Re: Rough Draft of Article on Writing Completion Functions

[John Beppu <beppu@xxxxxxx>]

[  date  ] 2002/04/05 | Friday | 09:05 AM
[ author ] Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxx> 

> compdef is actually a function defined in compinit. And nowadays
> there's not even specialised C-code behind it, just assocs and stuff.

fixed.
 
> A `+' after the option name means that the argument may come directly
> after the option in the same word or in the next word. That there is
> an argument to come is said by the `:descr:action' after the option
> description.

fixed.
 
> And we normally suggest to not leave out the colon before the action
> even if there is no action. Just to help _arguments to parse the stuff
> (well, we had some problems which should be fixed, but...). Personally
> I also find it a little less confusing with the trailing colon before
> the empty action.

I kinda hesitated on this one, but I did it, anyway.
fixed.
 
> This should use _files. Everyone should use _files. Almost noone
> should use _path_files. _files allows users to override glob patterns
> and stuff.

fixed.
 
> An alternative to this and the stuff in sidebar 4 would be to declare
> a local function, call it from the _arguments-actions and there give
> it an argument of `flf' or `flc'.

I was just being silly towards the end.  :-)